Shell commences Chukchi Sea drilling

  • Thread starter Thread starter Exiled_Child
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Exiled_Child

Guest
alaskajournal.com/Alaska-Journal-of-Commerce/August-Issue-2-2015/Shell-commences-Chukchi-Sea-drilling/

**Shell is finally drilling in the Chukchi Sea. The semi-submersible Polar Pioneer “spudded” the Burger J well at 5 p.m. July 30, company spokeswoman Meg Baldino said. Meanwhile, an ice-management vessel sent to Oregon for repairs, the Fennica, is now in Dutch Harbor en route to the Chukchi Sea after the repairs were complete.

Baldino confirmed the location of the vessel Aug. 5.

“The Fennica is now safely on its way and will join Shell’s exploration fleet in the Chukchi Sea — where the Transocean Polar Pioneer commenced initial drilling operations,” Baldino said in a statement. “We remain committed to operating safely and responsibly and adding to Shell’s long history of exploration offshore Alaska.”

Thirteen Greenpeace protesters in Portland delayed the departure of the Fennica by a day, dangling from the St. Johns Bridge over the Willamette River to block the safe passage ofthe vessel. Police removed the protestors from the bridge and chased a horde of kayakers from the ship’s path, allowing the Fennica to pass safely on July 30.

A federal judge in Anchorage held Greenpeace USA in contempt of court July 30 for violating an injunction prohibiting interference with Shell’s fleet, setting a fine of $2,500 per hour that accumulated from 10 a.m. Alaska time that day until the Fennica safely passed just before 5 p.m.

The Fennica developed a hull crack after striking a previously uncharted obstacle on departing Dutch Harbor July 3. The vessel was under the control of a licensed marine pilot at the time.

Until the Fennica arrives with a critical “capping stack” used to control an undersea blowout, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement has given Shell permission to drill “top holes,” or the upper parts of wells that do not penetrate potential oil-bearing formations.
Meanwhile, as the Polar Pioneer continues work at Burger J, Shell’s second drillship on the scene, the Noble Discoverer, is moored nearby, at the Burger V well location.

The wells are grouped around the Burger discovery made originally by Shell in the early 1990s. In 2012 during its last foray to the Arctic, Shell was able to drill a partly-complete well, Burger “A” at the site.
The company chose not to return to Burger A this season because it now believes a better picture of the potential reservoir can be gained by drilling at nearby locations identified as Burger J and V in the company’s drill plan.

The Transocean Polar Pioneer drill rig is currently drilling at the Burger J prospect while the Noble Discoverer drill rig is moored at Burger V. Shell may only drill one well at a time, and the Noble Discoverer will commence work after work stops at the Burger J well.

Shell may drill just one well at a time, although the second drillship can be kept nearby and ready to drill when the first vessel finishes a well. Federal rules prohibit simultaneous drilling within 15 miles, and Shell’s planned well locations, for this year, are nine miles apart.

“In the days to come, the team aboard the Polar Pioneer will work to complete the top portion of the well in anticipation of drilling to depth once the Fennica arrives on site,” Baldino said. “The top portion of the well is divided into stages. Initially, the ‘mudline cellar’, a 20-foot by 35-foot excavation, is drilled to allow the Blow Out Preventer to sit beneath the sea floor. The remaining portion of the well involves a series of casing and cement as approved and detailed in our permit. Essentially, this becomes the foundation for the well.”

Federal regulators have approved drilling without the “capping stack” so long as the well does not reach hydrocarbon-bearing zones.

“At this time we expect the Fennica to be ‘in theatre’ (in the Chukchi Sea) in time to drill into hydrocarbon-bearing zones. We are not working under any pre-determined timelines,” Baldino said.

Shell has permits to drill up to two wells. “Our plan is to make as much use of the time that we have in theatre before the ice arrives in (fall) 2015. Whatever we don’t accomplish in the summer ahead we are fully prepared to finish in 2016,” Baldino said.**
 
I live in Alaska, and I’m with GEddie. I’m for responsible exploration and production. Key word: responsible. Alaska has very stringent laws to protect our environment.
 
Many Alaskans are still effected by the Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989.

This article is entitled, “Warning To Gulf Volunteers: Almost Every Cleanup Worker From The 1989 Exxon Valdez Disaster Is Now Dead”
businessinsider.com/warning-to-gulf-cleanup-workers-almost-every-crew-member-from-the-1989-exxon-valdez-disaster-is-now-dead-2010-6

This article details how Exxon’s fines were drastically reduced after an interminable court battle.
sfgate.com/news/article/Ruling-cuts-Exxon-spill-victims-payout-again-3279430.php

This one is entitled, “25 Years After Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, Company Still Hasn’t Paid For Long-Term Environmental Damages”
thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/07/15/2301451/25-years-after-exxon-valdez-oil-spill-company-still-hasnt-paid-for-long-term-environmental-damages/

This drilling in the Chukchi is not a positive turn of events, at least with people I know up there.
 
Your source info is highly biased and I would say, inaccurate. This wasn’t ground zero for the World Trade Center after 9/11 when the Exxon Valdez happened. And Shell drilling in the Chukchi is not the equivalent of the Exxon Valdez, which was the result of a tanker running into a rock because it was off its charted course through a well mapped area.

And, fwiw, Alaskans get really sick of people from the lower 48 telling us what to do with our resources. And yes, it’s our resources- it’s codified into our state constitution. And yet there is no end of “environmentalists” who do not live here and haven’t got a clue how big Alaska is that think the very small footprint that oil drilling and refinement has up here is going to negatively impact us. Oil development even has majority support from the Alaskan Natives (who own the land the oil is being drilled on) and I think it could be argued that no one has a stronger interest in protecting the land than Alaskan Natives.

We care about our land. But it’s been proven time and again that responsible development makes protecting the land and extracting it’s resources simultaneously possible. It does not have to be a choice of one or the other.
 
I am happy that Shell is going ahead with the drilling and that the Fennica is well on its way. It was such a waste of police, fireman, and other resources for Portland to have to deal with the idiot protesters and kayakers who were causing problems for the Fennica.
 
Your source info is highly biased and I would say, inaccurate. This wasn’t ground zero for the World Trade Center after 9/11 when the Exxon Valdez happened. And Shell drilling in the Chukchi is not the equivalent of the Exxon Valdez, which was the result of a tanker running into a rock because it was off its charted course through a well mapped area.

And, fwiw, Alaskans get really sick of people from the lower 48 telling us what to do with our resources. And yes, it’s our resources- it’s codified into our state constitution. And yet there is no end of “environmentalists” who do not live here and haven’t got a clue how big Alaska is that think the very small footprint that oil drilling and refinement has up here is going to negatively impact us. Oil development even has majority support from the Alaskan Natives (who own the land the oil is being drilled on) and I think it could be argued that no one has a stronger interest in protecting the land than Alaskan Natives.

We care about our land. But it’s been proven time and again that responsible development makes protecting the land and extracting it’s resources simultaneously possible. It does not have to be a choice of one or the other.
Shell has a horrendous environmental and human rights record overseas. The only responsible development is no development.
 
Shell has a horrendous environmental and human rights record overseas. The only responsible development is no development.
You have every right to that opinion. And those who live up there have every right to ignore it.

Development is the price we pay for not living the nasty, brutal and short life that nature allows us on its own terms.

ICXC NIKA
 
Your source info is highly biased and I would say, inaccurate. This wasn’t ground zero for the World Trade Center after 9/11 when the Exxon Valdez happened. And Shell drilling in the Chukchi is not the equivalent of the Exxon Valdez, which was the result of a tanker running into a rock because it was off its charted course through a well mapped area.

And, fwiw, Alaskans get really sick of people from the lower 48 telling us what to do with our resources. And yes, it’s our resources- it’s codified into our state constitution. And yet there is no end of “environmentalists” who do not live here and haven’t got a clue how big Alaska is that think the very small footprint that oil drilling and refinement has up here is going to negatively impact us. Oil development even has majority support from the Alaskan Natives (who own the land the oil is being drilled on) and I think it could be argued that no one has a stronger interest in protecting the land than Alaskan Natives.

We care about our land. But it’s been proven time and again that responsible development makes protecting the land and extracting it’s resources simultaneously possible. It does not have to be a choice of one or the other.
Actually though, I do have a rather large circle of native friends, many of whom are from Alaska. The people I know don’t share your views on the environment, to put it very, very mildly. Also, I’d be curious to learn how much of this oil money Alaska itself even receives.

As far as the Valdez spill not being the equivalent of the Chukchi drilling, I believe that Exxon and Shell are two peas in a pod when it comes to environmental safety and environmental cleanup. I can only pray that it doesn’t come to that.
 
Fine words.
So how long have you lived naked and alone in the forest?

:whistle:
Ceasing the destruction of the natural world doesn’t require that anyone live naked and alone in the forest.
 
No development is not an option. Oil not only provides lubricants and fuels like gasoline and diesel, a byproduct is natural gas (which heats our homes and is used to generate power in many places and has extremely low emissions), it is also used to make plastics which are used for innumerable things that improve our lives. Responsible development is the only option for us unless you feel like going back to living in log cabins and burning wood and using horses for transportation. All of which would also likely be objected to by rabid environmentalists. Not to mention food safety and medical technology rely heavily on plastics and we’d see that go back 100 years.

If you want to live in a third world country, if you find that to be so much better, I suggest you give it a try. There’s quite a few of them still in existence that you can go visit without dragging the US backwards.
 
No development is not an option. Oil not only provides lubricants and fuels like gasoline and diesel, a byproduct is natural gas (which heats our homes and is used to generate power in many places and has extremely low emissions), it is also used to make plastics which are used for innumerable things that improve our lives. Responsible development is the only option for us unless you feel like going back to living in log cabins and burning wood and using horses for transportation. All of which would also likely be objected to by rabid environmentalists. Not to mention food safety and medical technology rely heavily on plastics and we’d see that go back 100 years.

If you want to live in a third world country, if you find that to be so much better, I suggest you give it a try. There’s quite a few of them still in existence that you can go visit without dragging the US backwards.
There are plenty of nations that rely primarily or entirely on alternative sources of energy. Oil consumption for energy and fuel is not required for a thriving and modern civilization. Responsible consumption is needed not more development of resources at the expense of environmental integrity. Perpetuating dependence on a finite resource isn’t responsible either. You keep talking about “responsible development,” but Shell’s environmental and human rights record suggests they are incapable of it.
 
There are plenty of nations that rely primarily or entirely on alternative sources of energy. Oil consumption for energy and fuel is not required for a thriving and modern civilization. Responsible consumption is needed not more development of resources at the expense of environmental integrity.
When the US can come up with alternative energy that can replace what we currently do with fossil fuels and do it in a manner that is affordable for the average American and better for the planet, I’m all for it. The greatest challenge to that is probably going to be environmentalist themselves. Wind power? Wind turbines are ugly and they kill birds. Hydro? Hydro affects the ability of fish to move to their spawning grounds. (Seriously, we have had two projects in Alaska on hydroelectric blocked by enviro’s who would rather see us burn oil than dam up a river). Solar is unreliable, expensive, and environmentally damaging to produce the panels. It is more costly to produce fuel from corn than it’s worth on the market, it’s not cost effective and can only be done with heavy gov’t subsidies.

If enviro’s like yourself really want to make a difference, then come up with the technology that makes the current production and consumption of fossil fuels safer and cleaner, or come up with replacement technologies that are just as effective, safer, and cleaner. Presented with two options where one is cleaner and they’re both inexpensive, people will choose the clean option. But expecting a family living on $30K a year to buy $20 LED lightbulbs or to put solar panels on their house, etc. is not going to happen.

And please STOP trying to block every project that comes along as though you’re not typing on a keyboard made of plastics, run on electricity that comes from fossil fuels, and that you don’t drive a car, or own a refrigerator, or heat your house, or benefit from modern medicine etc. That’s simply hypocritical- “good for me but not for thee.”
 
There are plenty of nations that rely primarily or entirely on alternative sources of energy. Oil consumption for energy and fuel is not required for a thriving and modern civilization. Responsible consumption is needed not more development of resources at the expense of environmental integrity. Perpetuating dependence on a finite resource isn’t responsible either. You keep talking about “responsible development,” but Shell’s environmental and human rights record suggests they are incapable of it.
No, there aren’t. A few countries have geographies that make it possible to have higher reliance upon alternative sources of energy, but most countries don’t. And even the ones that do have higher reliance, they still have conventional electricity backups for when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow.

But feel free to start getting rid of all the things in your life that involve oil: car, plastics, phones, tv, computer, internet, food, water, etc, etc, etc. And don’t bother using the hospital or doctors (you know, all those icky plastics they use), or restaurants, or grocery stores, or really anything whatsoever. Pick out a plot of land and live a life of seclusion.
 
Ceasing the destruction of the natural world doesn’t require that anyone live naked and alone in the forest.
In fact ,we should strive that basic development to begin with reaches every soul who is living in nasty ,and brutal conditions ,because of our indifference. That is something at hand for us.I think.
And I agree with you that it is not always going against Nature ,maybe it is because my hysband is repairing one of the windmills right now and it does not cease to amaze me that we can get clean water using that simple beautuful device,all of us and the animals.
 
Ceasing the destruction of the natural world doesn’t require that anyone live naked and alone in the forest.
Ah…
But you didn’t say "ceasing the destruction "
In fact, you spoke against development altogether.

I can quote the post if you would like.
 
Oil from the Arctic seems to be a much more ethical choice than oil from the Islamist state of Iran.
 
In fact ,we should strive that basic development to begin with reaches every soul who is living in nasty ,and brutal conditions ,because of our indifference. That is something at hand for us.I think.
And I agree with you that it is not always going against Nature ,maybe it is because my hysband is repairing one of the windmills right now and it does not cease to amaze me that we can get clean water using that simple beautuful device,all of us and the animals.
Good that you can do this. But not everyone can. My part of the country is blessed with a limestone karst geology, so anywhere you drill, you’ll find water, and not too far down either. (People who purport to be able to “witch for water” never fail because of it. :)) But it’s also true that the wind here is not capable, most of the time, of pulling water up from even a fairly shallow well. Water is heavy, and it takes a fair amount of force to lift even a thin stream. Windmills are geared down in order to get enough force. But days can go by without enough wind power to pump water. That’s why farmers around here abandoned windmills as soon as electricity became available. The power was stronger and more reliable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top